Russia Fears Viktor Bout Could Reveal Secrets

[geriatrickid]

The esteemed member Animatic likes to use a "special" kind of American English that most normal souls have difficulties with, reading and understanding.

And, that includes myself I have to admit, being of a possible lesser breed of intelligence than the writer in American English.

However, I could write the same in another language or 4, outside my Mother tongue, which the esteemed member wouldn't be able to "get it"" either but he's in favor since this is an English forum so I'm afraid I have to live with it.

But, that's not so difficult for me since I refrain reading his posts for some 99%, making my life easier.

LaoPo

Excuse me, but have you read any of the published transcripts? There can be no doubt that Mr. Bout entered the transaction of his own free will. He was not framed, nor entrapped. Mr. Bout's sole motivation was that of making a profit. His intent was to sell lethal weapons outside the regulated market. If he had believed that it was ethical and legal to sell lethal weapons to self professed terrorists then he could have applied for an export permit from the source countries and he could have applied for an import permit from Columbia. This is how deadly weapons are currently purchased from countries and sold in Columbia. Or, are you saying that Mr. Bout was not obliged to follow the law like other commercial enterprises?

When Mr. Bout was supplying Charles Taylor of Liberia's thugs as they raped, mutilated and brutalized their way across Liberia, do you think he had toime for the paperwork?

[EnSvenskTiger]

A few words and examples on the kind of people we discuss here and how they work and think.

Thailand have for centuries been regarded by the US as “their” nation. Good for use as a base to plot and plan against neighboring nations and RAR for their troops. Things went a little sour after the Mayaguez incident.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayaguez_incident

A few pages down we can read;

”Impact on Thailand

The Mayaguez incident had a direct effect on the political situation in Thailand. The U Tapao air base had been used by U.S. rescue forces despite an explicit refusal of permission by the relatively new civilian Thai government (after being refused by the Thai government, the US sought and obtained permission from the Thai military to proceed), resulting in considerable anger towards the United States. The Thai government called the act a violation of Thailand's sovereignty, and as soon as they returned to base, all the Marines were immediately flown to the Philippines. Many Thai groups called for the withdrawal of all U.S. forces from the country and exhibited an increased distrust of their own military, which they presumed to be complicit in the communications delay permitting the use of its <A href="file:///wiki/Air_base">air base.”

Well obviously they are back and if they cant get permission to operate at large within Thailand from the government, as I strongly suspects in this case, there are many smaller “bosses” just waiting to be bought and sign the “necessary documents”.

So how did the US plan the continuation of this “sting”?

I think we can see what they where planning to do in this article;

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20100721/159899183 .html

We can read;

"Konstantin [Yaroshenko] says that for two days he had no water or food and was beaten," the lawyer said. "Besides [they] demanded him to sign some papers,"

I'm not saying anything about guilt in that case or in the case of veteran Bout, simply because we don't know, but the behavior of the US and its long and renown disrespect for international laws and human rights disqualifies them from the international-police role they try to impose on Thailand and the world.

Stand up for your sovereignty Thailand!

Tiger

[whybother]

A few words and examples on the kind of people we discuss here and how they work and think.

<snip>

Stand up for your sovereignty Thailand!

Tiger

So, you're comparing a military incident in 1975 at / towards the end of the Vietnam war with a police "sting" operation in 2009?

[animatic]

name='animatic' '1287676184' post='3970930'

'Framed' means :

He had an opportunity to commit a crime and did NOT,

but they arrest him for it anyway,

and fabricate evidence to make the charge work.

As 'Sting' on the other hand means:

An opportunity is provided, real or not, for a person to actively commit

or conspire in committing the crime,

and that person DOES say or do what constitutes a crime,

by their own actions.

So he was not framed,

but set up to make HIM make that choice,

but walked through that portal willingly,

not realizing those he was conspiring with were not

who they purported to be.

That makes no difference because

HE DID THE DEED or SAID THE WORDS HIMSELF.

And conspiracy to commit crimes IS a crime.

OK; your American English is a lot better than mine will ever be.

Let's stick to STING...

Happy ?

LaoPo

Form Victor with love, should we use Russian English instead?

The esteemed member Animatic likes to use a "special" kind of American English that most normal souls have difficulties with, reading and understanding.

And, that includes myself I have to admit, being of a possible lesser breed of intelligence than the writer in American English.

However, I could write the same in another language or 4, outside my Mother tongue, which the esteemed member wouldn't be able to "get it"" either but he's in favor since this is an English forum so I'm afraid I have to live with it.

But, that's not so difficult for me since I refrain reading his posts for some 99%, making my life easier.

LaoPo

I wasn't the one using 'framed' incorrectly. In this sense used, it is an commonly understood, American colloquialism. I simply provided clarification of proper usage. Nothing 'special' about it, it has been used in Hollywood movies seen world wide since the 1920's at least. And is in Websters Dictionary.

And yes it is an English forum. I could write it in another language also,

but not with the precision, I also wouldn't expect my usage to be 100% accurate, and would opt for a word I was sure of.

I wonder if ease of life is something to aspire to?

It would seem to be diametrical to a good work ethic I fear.

Edited October 22, 2010 by animatic

[IAMSOBAD]

LaoPo playing God again.

Please go post on your Mother tongue forum. Stop using us as a place for you to Feel Superior.

Trust me...You are not!

You are a windbag who loves to argue with a classic Passive-Agressive Style!

You love to argue but must grab your toy and run home every single time another makes a stronger point than you.

You will be at 14,000 posts soon and said 0.

Have some respect for us and yourself.

Go post in Dutch!

[jdinasia]

That Victor Bout was not framed, entrapped etc is not in doubt except by the conspiracy theorists (who appear not to even be IN Thailand) that have an axe to grind against the US. The arrest was not made by anyone BUT the Thai police who were working with the DEA.

The man is an arms dealer. He was set up legally to commit a crime. He did so.

Fighting extradition is his right. The ball is in Thailand's court.

[IAMSOBAD]

Jdinasia I agree with your simple but corrrrrrrect post!

The people posting to the contrary are like the commie dream team of Dilly Dally and Stall.

Like Jatuporn getting angry and acting crazy...they emotionally post about everything BUT the facts.

Great post jd!

Edited October 22, 2010 by IAMSOBAD

[animatic]

LaoPo playing God again.

Please go post on your Mother tongue forum. Stop using us as a place for you to Feel Superior.

Trust me...You are not!

You are a windbag who loves to argue with a classic Passive-Agressive Style!

You love to argue but must grab your toy and run home every single time another makes a stronger point than you.

You will be at 14,000 posts soon and said 0.

Have some respect for us and yourself.

Go post in Dutch!

While I don't agree with LaoPo that often, he has made some good points

from time to time I typically find no reason to comment on those.

But occasionally do. And when I comment on what I find wrong headed,

or technically incorrect, and so a point is not being made coherently,

or based on false assumption, then I find an adversarial and too often

vituperative response. Such is life on TVF of course, and he is not alone,

in this regard, though seems to believe it is a personal singularity.

C'est la vie. Sharp wit, in native idium, is often misconstrued.

Edited October 22, 2010 by animatic

[LaoPo]

I wasn't the one using 'framed' incorrectly. In this sense used, it is an commonly understood, American colloquialism. I simply provided clarification of proper usage. Nothing 'special' about it, it has been used in Hollywood movies seen world wide since the 1920's at least. And is in Websters Dictionary.

And yes it is an English forum. I could write it in another language also,

but not with the precision, I also wouldn't expect my usage to be 100% accurate, and would opt for a word I was sure of.

I wonder if ease of life is something to aspire to?

It would seem to be diametrical to a good work ethic I fear.

I am grateful to greater minds rather than myself, forgiving me, for using a word which seemed to be not 100% correct in the context I used.

I am still learning.

LaoPo

[A_Traveller]

Excuse me, but have you read any of the published transcripts?

No, but I'd like to. Would you have a link or source for the transcripts? I'm assuming here you are not simply referring to the Grand Jury filings from the DEA, either the original, or the second rapidly deployed one, which added the targeting Americans IIRC.

Regards

[LaoPo]

LaoPo playing God again.

Please go post on your Mother tongue forum. Stop using us as a place for you to Feel Superior.

Trust me...You are not!

You are a windbag who loves to argue with a classic Passive-Agressive Style!

You love to argue but must grab your toy and run home every single time another makes a stronger point than you.

You will be at 14,000 posts soon and said 0.

Have some respect for us and yourself.

Go post in Dutch!

LaoPo

[SergeiY]

Now the its time for bitching about China. ...

What it has to do with the topic Bout ./. USA?

Just another example of the ignorance and hubris of the USA and its brainwashed patriotic citizen.

LaoPo: You have some great arguments. And being able to understand the difference between a country's government and it's citizens. Others, as you can see from the above quote, are less educated about this. Just jumping on the bashing bandwagon...and never replying to direct requests for substantiation of their claims. Sad...

Elmer, i am not talking about ALL American citizen, i made a differentiation, only those " brainwashed patriotic citizen" are full of ignorance and hubris. That are not all, that are actually just a few.

And hey, what has these bitching about China to do with the topic?

[LaoPo]

LaoPo playing God again.

Please go post on your Mother tongue forum. Stop using us as a place for you to Feel Superior.

Trust me...You are not!

You are a windbag who loves to argue with a classic Passive-Agressive Style!

You love to argue but must grab your toy and run home every single time another makes a stronger point than you.

You will be at 14,000 posts soon and said 0.

Have some respect for us and yourself.

Go post in Dutch!

IAMSOBAD: You're a member since close to 4 years....but the language you use in your post is off topic, below the belt and PERSONAL attacking and you should know that:

In using Thai Visa I agree:

1) To respect fellow members.

3) Not to post in a manner that is vulgar, obscene or profane .

4) Not to flame fellow members.

Flaming will not be tolerated. 'Flaming' is defined as posting or responding to a message in a way clearly intended to incite useless arguments, to launch personal attacks, to insult, or to be hateful towards other members. This includes useless criticism, name-calling, swearing and any other comments meant to incite anger.

5) Not to post inflammatory messages on the forum, or attempt to disrupt discussions to upset its participants, or trolling.

6) Not to post comments that could be reasonably construed as defamation or libel.

Defamation is the issuance of a false statement about another person, which causes that person to suffer harm. Libel involves the making of defamatory statements in a printed or fixed medium, such as a magazine or newspaper.

FROM:

http://www.thaivisa....tion=boardrules

Try to behave as a debater not a personal attacker.

LaoPo

[IAMSOBAD]

Classic Passive Agressive post!

Post to me but say nothing!

Post to animatic saying ...i dont need a lecture or words similar...and then post that you were wrong and that he is smarter than you.

In a court of law framed and stung make the dif between who is and who is not the wrong doer.

Bout was caught in a sting by His actions.

You can post to me anytime if you read my posts.

You admitted you ignore 99 percent of posts but keep arguing anyway.

Not too clever.

[LaoPo]

Classic Passive Agressive post!

Post to me but say nothing!

Post to animatic saying ...i dont need a lecture or words similar...and then post that you were wrong and that he is smarter than you.

In a court of law framed and stung make the dif between who is and who is not the wrong doer.

Bout was caught in a sting by His actions.

You can post to me anytime if you read my posts.

You admitted you ignore 99 percent of posts but keep arguing anyway.

Not too clever.

LaoPo

[hanuman1]

LaoPo playing God again.

Please go post on your Mother tongue forum. Stop using us as a place for you to Feel Superior.

Trust me...You are not!

You are a windbag who loves to argue with a classic Passive-Agressive Style!

You love to argue but must grab your toy and run home every single time another makes a stronger point than you.

You will be at 14,000 posts soon and said 0.

Have some respect for us and yourself.

Go post in Dutch!

While I don't agree with LaoPo that often, he has made some good points

from time to time I typically find no reason to comment on those.

But occasionally do. And when I comment on what I find wrong headed,

or technically incorrect, and so a point is not being made coherently,

or based on false assumption, then I find an adversarial and too often

vituperative response. Such is life on TVF of course, and he is not alone,

in this regard, though seems to believe it is a personal singularity.

C'est la vie. Sharp wit, in native idium, is often misconstrued.

So why use it in a general forum with an international audience? I would assume you wanted to communicate effectively.

I have secretly admired your use of quatrains and quintains to ostensibly add a certain poetic lyricism and intellectual weight to your arguments.

I look forward to an epic on a par with 'Paradise Lost' in full iambic pentameter should the Democrat party be dissolved in the coming months.

Edited October 22, 2010 by hanuman1

[TAWP]

I could not care less if you think the idea of arresting someone for an imaginary crime, purposely done with entrapment using an organizations name that the country behind the imaginary crime accusation is labeling a terrorist organization so everyone will stop thinking and just go along with whatever they are saying, is fair and 'good'.

Can you name the reason they picked FARC, an organization Bout has never worked with in the past, instead of say...Girls Scouts of America? The imaginary crime is exactly the same. But they hope you and others will react as you are - turning your brains off and reacting emotionally.

Well, my position is that Bout is and should be allowed to sell the arms to ANYONE that as so wishes to purchase them. Neither the US, UN or other wannabe global government organizations has any right to dictate that he has not. That some of you are pro-fascist and pro-police state solutions including repressive world governments isn't exactly new. But it would be interesting to see someone explain why Bout should be limited to sell to customers or why he should be held responsible, and others be allowed to sell or not held responsible for doing the same actions - selling any wares.

[SergeiY]

I could not care less if you think the idea of arresting someone for an imaginary crime, purposely done with entrapment using an organizations name that the country behind the imaginary crime accusation is labeling a terrorist organization so everyone will stop thinking and just go along with whatever they are saying, is fair and 'good'.

Can you name the reason they picked FARC, an organization Bout has never worked with in the past, instead of say...Girls Scouts of America? The imaginary crime is exactly the same. But they hope you and others will react as you are - turning your brains off and reacting emotionally.

Well, my position is that Bout is and should be allowed to sell the arms to ANYONE that as so wishes to purchase them. Neither the US, UN or other wannabe global government organizations has any right to dictate that he has not. That some of you are pro-fascist and pro-police state solutions including repressive world governments isn't exactly new. But it would be interesting to see someone explain why Bout should be limited to sell to customers or why he should be held responsible, and others be allowed to sell or not held responsible for doing the same actions - selling any wares.

Bingo.

[jdinasia]

I could not care less if you think the idea of arresting someone for an imaginary crime, purposely done with entrapment using an organizations name that the country behind the imaginary crime accusation is labeling a terrorist organization so everyone will stop thinking and just go along with whatever they are saying, is fair and 'good'.

Can you name the reason they picked FARC, an organization Bout has never worked with in the past, instead of say...Girls Scouts of America? The imaginary crime is exactly the same. But they hope you and others will react as you are - turning your brains off and reacting emotionally.

Well, my position is that Bout is and should be allowed to sell the arms to ANYONE that as so wishes to purchase them. Neither the US, UN or other wannabe global government organizations has any right to dictate that he has not. That some of you are pro-fascist and pro-police state solutions including repressive world governments isn't exactly new. But it would be interesting to see someone explain why Bout should be limited to sell to customers or why he should be held responsible, and others be allowed to sell or not held responsible for doing the same actions - selling any wares.

Point by point ....

1) It isn't an imaginary crime. That it is not a crime is perhaps delusional.

2) The FARC has a history that speaks for itself.

3) Why pick FARC? The very fact that he had no inside contacts with them so the deal would be unquestioned. If they had said "Libya" then he would have called his friends in "Libya" that are responsible along with himself for past atrocities and checked up on the purchasers.

4) Your position seems to allow for ANYTHING to be legal. The fact that it isn't that way is sad for you perhaps, but good for the rest of the people in the world. Your suggestion would make sales of weapons to children acceptable. Sad! It doesn't make people either "pro-fascist" or "pro-police state" to be against illegal arms sales. That you spin it that way is just appealing to emotion and not reason.

5) Some arms sales are legal. Go about it legally and then you don't have to worry about it.

[SergeiY]

2) The FARC has a history that speaks for itself.

An so has the involvement of the USA and some of their secret missions in Colombia a history ...

[ianf]

I could not care less if you think the idea of arresting someone for an imaginary crime, purposely done with entrapment using an organizations name that the country behind the imaginary crime accusation is labeling a terrorist organization so everyone will stop thinking and just go along with whatever they are saying, is fair and 'good'.

Can you name the reason they picked FARC, an organization Bout has never worked with in the past, instead of say...Girls Scouts of America? The imaginary crime is exactly the same. But they hope you and others will react as you are - turning your brains off and reacting emotionally.

Well, my position is that Bout is and should be allowed to sell the arms to ANYONE that as so wishes to purchase them. Neither the US, UN or other wannabe global government organizations has any right to dictate that he has not. That some of you are pro-fascist and pro-police state solutions including repressive world governments isn't exactly new. But it would be interesting to see someone explain why Bout should be limited to sell to customers or why he should be held responsible, and others be allowed to sell or not held responsible for doing the same actions - selling any wares.

Point by point ....

1) It isn't an imaginary crime. That it is not a crime is perhaps delusional.

2) The FARC has a history that speaks for itself.

3) Why pick FARC? The very fact that he had no inside contacts with them so the deal would be unquestioned. If they had said "Libya" then he would have called his friends in "Libya" that are responsible along with himself for past atrocities and checked up on the purchasers.

4) Your position seems to allow for ANYTHING to be legal. The fact that it isn't that way is sad for you perhaps, but good for the rest of the people in the world. Your suggestion would make sales of weapons to children acceptable. Sad! It doesn't make people either "pro-fascist" or "pro-police state" to be against illegal arms sales. That you spin it that way is just appealing to emotion and not reason.

5) Some arms sales are legal. Go about it legally and then you don't have to worry about it.

The world is full of fascists who want to control everyone else by their force of arms and their wealth. They are all willing to pay disgusting people large sums of money to acquire weapons that will be used to kill people - innocents, women, children and so on. People who sell but I bet your botom dollar that he has dirty handsarms to terrorist factions or terrorist states like Burma should be more than ashamed of themselves and in my view should be thrown into the nearest snakepit as these are the people who encourage the growth of terror in this world. I don't know anything about Bout (or aBout!) but I bet your bottom dollar that he has dirty hands. I wish we could ride the world of people like this.

[jdinasia]

2) The FARC has a history that speaks for itself.

An so has the involvement of the USA and some of their secret missions in Colombia a history ...

Not the issue in this thread In this thread an illegal arms dealer gets busted in a legitimate way and the Russians apparently think he could tell things that would make them look bad

[SergeiY]

Your suggestion would make sales of weapons to children acceptable. Sad! It doesn't make people either "pro-fascist" or "pro-police state" to be against illegal arms sales. That you spin it that way is just appealing to emotion and not reason.

huh?

Actually you an other spinning it in a way that appeals emotion and not reason.

I wonder what comes next: If Bout don't go to an American jail GOD kills a kitten?

[jdinasia]

Your suggestion would make sales of weapons to children acceptable. Sad! It doesn't make people either "pro-fascist" or "pro-police state" to be against illegal arms sales. That you spin it that way is just appealing to emotion and not reason.

huh?

Actually you an other spinning it in a way that appeals emotion and not reason.

I wonder what comes next: If Bout don't go to an American jail GOD kills a kitten?

Another appeal to emotion and not reason. There are legal ways to sell weapons and illegal ways. Thai police arrested Bout for attempting the illegal way It isn't fascist to not want someone to sell weapons to children, terrorists, gang members, or drug dealers. It doesn't make ANY country a "police state" to have laws against the illegal distribution of weapons.

[SergeiY]

2) The FARC has a history that speaks for itself.

An so has the involvement of the USA and some of their secret missions in Colombia a history ...

Not the issue in this thread In this thread an illegal arms dealer gets busted in a legitimate way and the Russians apparently think he could tell things that would make them look bad

Troll, you came up with the FARC history. So look at it.

Another lame example of your circular reasoning.

the questions are

a) what is illegal and what is legitimate

FYI: Not everyone agrees here with the US-American viewpoint.

And how you know what "the Russians apparently think "?

[jdinasia]

ALL arms producing countries, factories, dealers AND buyers are hypocritical @ssholes and it's all about money and power.

The dream of a weapon free world is far away and will probably never come...

LaoPo

Laopo own personal hypocrosy is he refuses to consider and does not think about Viktor selling arms in the most horrific post WWII conflicts this world has seen; The Congo, The Sudanese Civil War Version 2.0. No Laopo wants to get on his podium and preach to the choir about merkan hypocrisy.

And in doing that, he ignores Viktors crimes. Good on you Laopo but not much different than the FOX news yahoo's in merika itself. You believe you are different from them? You are just another facet of the same problem. And that Means you deserve these merkins who hound you on this forum, waa waa.

If Bout is guilty of any crimes he should be brought to trial, preferably an International Court, NOT a single country.

I NEVER defended Bout in any of my posts.

It's the WAY the US thinks it can act, all over the world, and direct governments, with or without their knowledge and/or approval to get hold of people who are not convicted yet and bring them to justice in the USA for crimes they did NOT commit on American soil.

It happened before, it's happening now with Bout, and it happened in the aftermath of 9/11, when the CIA (with or without the Bush Administration's knowledge) illegally transporting suspects and having them tortured on third countries' soil.

THAT is what I am opposing to...!

And than...

....than, if I write that I don't understand the hypocritical attitude by the US government (and the silent people of America) in the sale of $ 60 Billion to the Saudis I am attacked ?

Get real.

Attack the Saudis who delivered the 9/11 hijackers,..... attack your own American government for being such hypocrites, but not a simple sole like me here on a forum who's expressing his opinion which is probably shared by the majority of American people, also opposing to the weapon sales to Saudi Arabia.

Wait and see...the news is only a day old.

LaoPo

Actually you claimed to know for a fact that Bout was framed and that IS defending him.

Your attempt to side-track the discussion with the US-Saudi arms deal is simply off base. I am sure even the NL has produced some terrorists and other rejects in the past. It doesn't make it a cogent point in this discussion. If the Saudi Government was guilty of what some of its citizens were it STILL wouldn't be relevant to a discussion about Bout.

[LaoPo]

Actually you claimed to know for a fact that Bout was framed and that IS defending him.

Your attempt to side-track the discussion with the US-Saudi arms deal is simply off base. I am sure even the NL has produced some terrorists and other rejects in the past. It doesn't make it a cogent point in this discussion. If the Saudi Government was guilty of what some of its citizens were it STILL wouldn't be relevant to a discussion about Bout.

1. Is that so?

Bout was set-up in a sting operation (not framed as corrected by the esteemed Animatic, being wrong language ) by the US on Thai soil. Is that defending Bout? You have to do better than that jdinasia.

I'm not defending Bout; I'm opposing to the SYSTEM the Americans used in this deal.

2. My example with the $ 60 Billion arms deal with the Saudis was an example that the Americans justify on one hand the arrest of Bout for -possible- dealing in weapons and on the other hand such a huge weapons deal is justified by the same Americans for all kind of reasons.

That's hypocritical.

But, it makes no sense in the Bout case to ventilate over and over again.

We seem to have 2 parties in the discussion and we agree that we disagree.

Simple, but that doesn't mean that some of you (not you, jdinasia) take the opportunity to bash upon other members PERSONALLY only because they have a different opinion.

That's not done.

LaoPo

[jdinasia]

Alas, bout wasn't framed ... wasn't set up, he did get caught in a sting. He got caught and arrested NOT by the US but by the Thai police who were working with the DEA to get a known gun-runner in jail.

What happened to Bout was legal ... legal in Thailand, Legal in the US, and I am sure legal in the NL. To pose as a buyer to give a seller the opportunity to get caught breaking the law is common practice. Bout won't be charged with selling arms to FARC. He didn't. He will be charged with conspiracy to sell arms to FARC. Which he (to the best of his knowledge) did. Additional charges like conspiracy to aid a known terrorist organization may also be charged against him.

Your claims of hypocrisy on the part of the US in selling arms to Saudi Arabia is hypocrisy. They didn't hide the deal. They didn't meet in a hotel room and try and figure out if someone was a cop. They did what most countries do. They came to an arrangement and announced it. Your attempts to bring 9-11 into it are equally hypocritical. It was people of a similar ilk as Bout's average customer that pulled off 9-11 ... NOT Saudi Arabia.

[SergeiY]

Bout was set-up in a sting operation (not framed as corrected by the esteemed Animatic, being wrong language ) by the US on Thai soil. Is that defending Bout? You have to do better than that jdinasia.

I'm not defending Bout; I'm opposing to the SYSTEM the Americans used in this deal.

The patriotic one-dimensional flat 'thinkers' follow a simpleton logic that goes: "If you're not with us you're against us"

The patriotic one-dimensional flat 'thinkers' are not known for critical thinking, they don't have the ability to think that their position is maybe not 100% right without any doubts.

They are good in flag waving, singing patriotic songs and circular reasoning but not reflective thoughts.

[geriatrickid]

I could not care less if you think the idea of arresting someone for an imaginary crime, purposely done with entrapment using an organizations name that the country behind the imaginary crime accusation is labeling a terrorist organization so everyone will stop thinking and just go along with whatever they are saying, is fair and 'good'.

Can you name the reason they picked FARC, an organization Bout has never worked with in the past, instead of say...Girls Scouts of America? The imaginary crime is exactly the same. But they hope you and others will react as you are - turning your brains off and reacting emotionally.

Well, my position is that Bout is and should be allowed to sell the arms to ANYONE that as so wishes to purchase them. Neither the US, UN or other wannabe global government organizations has any right to dictate that he has not. That some of you are pro-fascist and pro-police state solutions including repressive world governments isn't exactly new. But it would be interesting to see someone explain why Bout should be limited to sell to customers or why he should be held responsible, and others be allowed to sell or not held responsible for doing the same actions - selling any wares.

Ahh the Libertarian position. Your position of protecting the liberty of some actually restricts the liberty of others. Your view is that the market should set the controls, the free actions of the people will manage things. Unfortunately, that is not the case as markets are manipulated and controlled by those that have the means to do so. Usually it is a small handful of people driven by greed and a lust for profit that robs the liberty of others. Your market approach on issues of public safety has consistently delivered chaos, whereas the current limited marketed controls on armaments provide something that the people as a whole agree upon. Do you really believe that the Pakisatanis, North Koreans and Iranians should be able to purchase nuclear weapons on the open market? How then do you deal with a country like North Korea that would use such weapons to extort and threaten others?

The unfettered sale of lethal weapons denies liberty because it provides an advantage to those with the means to purchase the weapons to impose their will on those that disagree or that choose the path of non violence. What of a person's liberty to not live in fear of a neighbour next door that owns anthrax laden munitions or a bazooka or decides to warehouse 100kilos of explosives? Under your system, any and all could purchase weapons, Is that really in the benefit of peace and prosperity and respect for the liberty of others?

I wrote it before and I will write it again, had Mr. Bout had a legitimate market opportunity to sell arms he could have sold them. Nothing stopped Mr. Bout from applying for weapons export permits from the Ukraine or Bulgaria. Nothing stopped Mr. Bout from applying for a weapons import permit to Columbia. Mr. Bout chose to pass on that because he wished to circumvent the process of transparency. In Liberia where Mr. Bout provided the arms that kept Charles Taylor in power, Mr. Bout provided weapons contrary to the public sentiment, contrary to international sanctions and contrary to the basic tenets of humanity. He couldn't have carried less about your lofty notions of liberty as his sole motibation was to make a profit. Mr. Bout's actions were suppressing the individual liberties of Liberians. However, Mr. Bout was protected by the United Arab Emirates and was able to operate using the government of Charles Taylor, he had the liberty tosell weapons in Liberia. The result was the infringement of others' liberties.